![\"dark](\"http:\/\/blogs.kent.ac.uk\/melodramaresearchgroup\/files\/2015\/01\/dark-Mirror-opening.png\")
<\/a> mirroring. It was noted that the particular pictures chosen also seemed to particularly relate to the twin theme central to the film\u2019s narrative since some of the blots appeared to resemble wombs. The doubling theme is elaborated on in relation to the Rorschach test when both Ruth and Terry (both played by de Havilland) are seen to undergo this psychological test soon after one another, but with very different results.<\/p>\nThe film\u2019s use of technology while the two characters de Havilland plays appear simultaneously on the screen was praised, with only a few lighting differences obviously discernible. De Havilland\u2019s performance(s) also aided the seamlessness. It was almost possible to forget that the actress played both parts, despite the fact the twins are identical. \u00a0Character differences were evident from the start \u2013 Ruth\u2019s timidity was contrasted to Terry\u2019s confidence. De Havilland\u2019s playing of these early scenes was nuanced enough to indicate Ruth and Terry\u2019s distinct personalities, without exaggerating them. As time progressed and Terry\u2019s \u2018evil\u2019 nature was revealed de Havilland\u2019s facial expressions in particular became more manic. It is impressive that de Havilland also managed to convey Ruth\u2019s apparent descent into madness with a different touch. Terry was tricking her sister into believing she herself had gone insane. Costume also played an interesting role in aiding the audience\u2019s attempt to differentiate the twins. The fact that no-one in the narrative is meant to know that there is more than one twin (the twins share a job selling magazines at a stand) explains some of their identical outfits. \u00a0It seems unlikely, however, that they would necessarily need to wear identical clothes at the same time. We also wondered why the twins shared a job.\u00a0 Perhaps this has a practical application since one twin has, after all, we presume, It is telling that one of the few physical ways the twins can be differentiated is by the use of jewellery. Both own a necklace with their name featured prominently, as well as initial brooches. When Terry is impersonating Ruth, it is even seen that Ruth (and presumably Terry) owns a compact mirror with her initial engraved on it. This was particularly noticed by the group as Terry removed it from her handbag after the Doctor had started to make clear he knew her real identity. \u00a0This was a very suspenseful moment \u2013 signalled, as was the case throughout the film \u2013 with dramatic music. In fact some of us thought Terry was about to brandish a gun. The necklaces, brooches and compact mirrors are items which can all be grouped under the term \u2018women\u2019s accoutrements\u2019. Such accessories are sometimes sold, at times in connection with film stars, as ways of individuating oneself. The fact that this \u2018female\u2019 item, particularly one used to reflect on one\u2019s appearance, is very significant. This is in terms of commenting on the theme of the double, but also because it is a replacement for the expected item – the arguably \u2018male\u2019 gun.<\/p>\n We noted a couple of aspects which we have previously discussed in terms of melodrama. The film\u2019s dramatic music \u2013 and the fact that Terry uses a concealed music box to convince Ruth that the latter is going mad with auditory hallucinations \u2013 was noted. We also expressed views on the comic elements present in the film. These, usually related to the detective, seemed to sit uncomfortably with the seriousness of the film\u2019s subject matter. They can be related to the presence of the comic subplot in some theatrical dramas \u2013 Finally we discussed the fact that while the film provided a great showcase for de Havilland and her dual performances, the men in the narrative were afforded far more power. This is seen in the \u2018active\u2019 occupations of both the detective and the psychologist. Furthermore this is directed towards proving the guilt of the twin who has killed, Terry, the least passive of the twins. By the end of the film we presume Terry will be institutionalised, while Ruth has been safely domesticated in a romance with the psychologist.<\/p>\n Do, as ever, \u00a0log in to comment, or email me on sp458@kent.ac.uk<\/span><\/a>, to add your thoughts.<\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":" Unsurprisingly quite a lot of our discussion on The Dark Mirror (1946) focused on the Doubling aspect. This was commented on in several ways: \u00a0in terms of psychology, technology, Olivia de Havilland\u2019s \u2013performance(s), costume, doubling in terms of our comparing … Continue reading <\/a>De Havilland\u2019s performance as Ruth therefore included expressions of bewilderment and fear in contrast to Terry\u2019s planned and controlled scheming.<\/p>\n<\/a> committed murder and might need to be fairly closely observed by the other. \u00a0Perhaps it also comments on a deeper psychological attachment. It is also the case that the twins wore the same clothes outside of work, even donning identical nightgowns. The identical costumes tailed off as the film progressed and by end evil Terry is seen all in black and innocent Ruth in a white top.<\/p>\n<\/a>as evidenced in our read-through of the Melville Brothers\u2019\u00a0\u00a0A Girl\u2019s Cross Roads<\/em> (1903). More specifically, a connection can be made between Mitchell\u2019s detective and the one played by Frank Pettingell in Thorold Dickinson\u2019s British film version of Gaslight<\/em> (1940). Interestingly this is another narrative about a relative (a husband in this case) trying to send a woman mad.<\/p>\n<\/a><\/p>\n